• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

H.R. 367 Hearing Protection Act

carbinemike

carbinemike

Global Moderator
Staff member
Global Moderator
"Philanthropist"
Here is the first gun related legislation since the new Congress was sworn in...removing suppressors from NFA status and making them a standard back ground check item. I hope they cram all they can through Congress because they are only guaranteed control of Congress for 2 years until the mid term elections.

FAIRFAX, Va. – The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) applauded Congressmen Jeff Duncan (SC) and John Carter (TX-31) on Monday for introducing the Hearing Protection Act, an important bill that gives gun owners and sportsmen the opportunity to better protect their ears and hearing.
“Many gun owners and sportsmen suffer severe hearing loss after years of shooting, and yet the tool necessary to reduce such loss is onerously regulated and taxed. It doesn’t make any sense,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director, NRA-ILA. “The Duncan-Carter Hearing Protection Act would allow people easier access to suppressors, which would help them to better protect their hearing.”
The Hearing Protection Act, H.R. 367, would remove suppressors from regulation under the National Firearms Act, replacing the federal transfer process with a National Instant Criminal Background Check. The bill would reduce the cost of purchasing a suppressor by removing the $200 transfer tax.
Suppressors are often mischaracterized in Hollywood. They do not “silence” the sound of a firearm. Instead, they act as mufflers and can reduce the noise of a gunshot to hearing safe levels. Not only do suppressors reduce hearing damage for the shooter, they reduce the noise of ranges located near residential areas.
H.R. 367 would make it easier for gun owners and sportsmen to purchase suppressors in the 42 states where they are currently legal. Purchasers would have to pass a background check to buy them, and prohibited people would be denied.
NRA is proud to have partnered with ASA on this important legislation.
“Gun owners and sportsmen should be able to practice their sport with the tools necessary to do so safely. This bill makes it easier for them to do that,” concluded Cox.
Click to expand...
 
I'm not holding my breath that this will go through. Lots of opposition due to the standard operational procedures of lies preying on ignorance.

I received this email from ASA when it was submitted Monday.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The American Suppressor Association (ASA) is pleased to announce the reintroduction of the Hearing Protection Act (HPA) by Rep. Jeff Duncan (SC-03) and Rep. John Carter (TX-31). This historic piece of legislation, which was originally introduced by Rep. Matt Salmon (AZ-05) in the 114th Congress, will remove suppressors from the purview of the National Firearms Act (NFA), replacing the antiquated federal transfer process with an instantaneous NICS background check. The HPA also includes a provision to refund the $200 transfer tax to applicants who purchase a suppressor after October 22, 2015, which was the original date of introduction.

“The American Suppressor Association believes that citizens should not have to pay a tax to protect their hearing while exercising their Second Amendment rights,” said Knox Williams, President and Executive Director of the ASA. “We are thrilled for the opportunity to work with Representatives Duncan and Carter, who have reintroduced the Hearing Protection Act in this new Congress. Although we recognize that introducing this bill is the first step in what will be a lengthy process to change federal law, we look forward to working on the Duncan-Carter bill, alongside the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, the National Rifle Association, and the National Shooting Sports Foundation to advance and ultimately enact this common-sense legislation.”

For the full release click HERE:
 
Well...if it can't be passed with a Republican President, Senate, and House...it NEVER will !!

But yea...the misconceptions are out there. Thing is...something like 39 states allow hunting with them...my state, Pennsylvania, included.
 
My state also allows ownership and hunting with them.

And I just have to say it. The 2A isn't about hunting. ;)

It already passed the house, despite being during the obama administration.

Now, to see what Congress will do with it. And then Trump. And then the Supreme court no doubt.
 
John A. said:
I'm not holding my breath that this will go through. Lots of opposition due to the standard operational procedures of lies preying on ignorance.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it will pass either but I'm glad the current Congress started out on the attack. They need to overwhelm the democrats with good legislation since they may only control Congress for 2 years.
 
I think that was Obama's problem when he started out but it helped the country. They put so much of his first two years into the Affordable Care Act. By the time it signed into law he had lost the house in the mid term election and his dreams of a socialist revolution were done. I firmly believe the democrat egos were so inflated they thought they would have 8 years to govern with republicans minorities. I also believe gun control was slated for his second term. I didn't like when I heard the republicans want to roll back the ACA now and take up to two years for a replacement. If they wait that long they may be negotiating with the democrats instead of dictating to them. Plus, they had 6 years to come up with a replacement.
 
Last edited:
I know the ACA is entirely off topic, but I agree.

I fear repealing the law as a whole.

The #1 reason being, there are a lot of people covered now, that wouldn't have been eligible before because of pre-existing conditions.

I haven't spoken much about it publically, but my mother is battling terminal cancer. And if she loses healthcare because they revert back to the "pre-existing condition" standard, she will lose insurance and there is no one that I know that can afford it out of pocket because the pharmaceutical companies and a host of other things that are involved.

It will be a death sentence for her and countless others who are in the same or similar conditions like needing transplants, and other things.

That would be horrific for the republican party. I will probably convert to democrat if it happens to be honest.
 
It's off topic but it's not in that they need to move fast but they need to offer and pass good legislation too.

I'll say a prayer for your mom.
 
I'd like to see this pass.

Would people named on existing trusts be grandfathered in and excluded from the BG checks? I admit I have not had time to read the full wording on this.

While in many regards a good thing, it could be a workaround for existing trusts. Yes my mind always looks at it from the other side; legislators rarely do anything good for tbe people that does not also further their own agendas in some way.
 
Here's my take on it Mike.

You won't be exempted from background checks. That's never going to happen. Except maybe if they include CCW exemptions like they do with guns, but I haven't heard it discussed so I'll refrain from speculating.

What it'll do is remove silencers from the NFA and treat them like any other gun. Pistol. Rifle. Shotgun. Whatever. But you'd have to do an instant background check (4473 I assume) just like you would if you were buying a pistol.

I admit that I don't really know how trusts are looked at in the law and the processes for them, but this will essentially negate the purpose of a trust to own silencers altogether. As for trusts, I don't know the steps to removing items from them or even if you would have to remove them from the trust, but future silencer purchases wouldn't need to be added to them for sure.

If this bill passes as worded now, any silencer (nfa tax) that was paid/made after Oct 2015, they'd have to refund that money back to you.

Yes, I would lose the money for 2 tax stamps that existed prior to that, but I promise not to cry about it.
 
Well the whole business is insane of course.

If the government says you passed the background check to buy a gun, buying a silencer should not be prohibited.

When they first allowed you to buy the guns, they had already determined that you are not dangerous.

And it's not the owning of the gun or a silencer or a bullet that makes one dangerous.
 
It would greatly help states where we cannot have cans at all like NJ where we would be happy to pay the $200 stamp just to be allowed to have one.
 
I don't know that it would help if there is a state where silencers are prohibited. It would be no different than where certain guns are allowed by state law.

All this will do, is remove the $200 tax on them essentially.
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but buying a suppressor will be like buying a gun--just have to be approved by NICBC. Probably still have to pay your standard FFL fees.

But what about when/if you sell it? Will there be recording requirements? I would worry Congress would try to insert a "Universal Background Check" as part of the bill. :(

Will some of them still be a "sealed" unit or will one part of the suppressor become the "receiver" or "frame" and be serialized?

Maybe they could tack it onto Trumpcare as "preventative" heathcare... ;)

If it passes, I see win-win for everyone as the costs will eventually come down once supply catches up to demand. More companies will gear up to make them for consumers as the market will need to be supplied.
 
It would be like buying a gun.

Unsure if there will be further recording requirements or not. I don't recall it being mentioned in the bill itself, but I'm sure it will be discussed. Since the Dems want to kill the bill so badly, I expect a bunch of poison pill amendments to it, or any other procedural interference they can do to stop it.

The way that it is now, current guidelines say that the tube is the proper serialized part. While there are some models that serialized the endcap in the past, which I like the best, the tube is now the standardized part that is serialized. Much like a receiver where a gun in concerned, though in all fairness, a gun can also be serialized on the barrel.

Sealed or user serviceable, is by design. Not by a legal requirement.
 
John A. said:
I don't know that it would help if there is a state where silencers are prohibited. It would be no different than where certain guns are allowed by state law.

All this will do, is remove the $200 tax on them essentially.
Click to expand...
Oh o.k...that sucks....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top